TWO SNP politicians have written to the Metropolitan Police after being told that they had decided not to investigate the “cash for peerages” allegations.
Aberdeen Central MSP Kevin Stewart and Stephen Flynn, MP for Aberdeen South, wrote to Detective Inspector Trevor Normoyle, the operational head of the Special Enquiry Team, after he told them there was “insufficient information” on which to launch a criminal investigation.
However, the pair said they were surprised at the claim, given the amount of information published by openDemocracy and The Sunday Times, following their joint investigation.
READ MORE: 'Why won't they look?': Top lawyer questions Met's dismissal of SNP ‘cash for honours' complaint
That revealed last week how Tory treasurers who donated £3 million to the party seemed to be almost guaranteed a peerage.
All but one of the past 16 treasurers have been offered seats in the Lords, having each given at least £3m.
One former Tory party chairman said: “Once you pay your £3m, you get your peerage.”
Following the report, Stewart and Flynn wrote to Metropolitan Police commissioner, Cressida Dick, asking her to “fully investigate whether any law has been broken”.
In their response to Normoyle, they wrote: “Could you please explain what additional information would be needed in order to justify launching an investigation?”
They said they expected that many people would draw parallels between the latest allegations and those from the cash for peerages scandal investigated in 2006 and 2007.
“In that investigation, the police interviewed 136 people, including the then Prime Minister, Tony Blair, who was interviewed three times, and the Scottish First Minister of the day, Jack McConnell.
“When the decision was made not to bring charges against anyone, there was at least a sense that the matter had been properly investigated.
“Perhaps it may be helpful if you could explain the differences that have meant these more recent allegations have not triggered a similar investigation.
“For example; is there a material difference in the information that was available initially or has there been a change in guidance.”
READ MORE: Demand for fresh investigations into PM and Jacob Rees-Mogg over Tory sleaze
The pair added: “Finally, we note that there has only ever been one person convicted of breaching the Honours (Prevention of Abuses) Act 1925, which was in 1933.
“Would it be at all possible to outline the extent of evidence that would be required to bring forward charges or secure a guilty verdict under this act?”
SNP MP Pete Wishart had also called for the matter to be investigated in a letter to Dick, but he too was told there was not enough evidence.
That prompted barrister Jolyon Maugham, director of Good Law Project, to write on social media that the force’s dismissal seemed “to misunderstand the Met's role”.
He said: “It's not @PeteWishart's job to gather the evidence. He doesn't have power to compel the production of documents and interview witnesses. That's the Met's job.
“So why won't they look?”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel